[Pubmed] Artificial Intelligence Diagnosis of Ocular Motility Disorders From Clinical Videos

Intégration des publications parues sur PUBMED
Répondre
Avatar du membre

Auteur du sujet
RSS-Bot
Ami(e) de Diamant
Ami(e) de Diamant
Messages : 6511
Enregistré le : 31 mai 2020 09:57
6
Zodiaque :
Âge : 22
Contact :
    Windows 10 Firefox

[Pubmed] Artificial Intelligence Diagnosis of Ocular Motility Disorders From Clinical Videos

Message par RSS-Bot »

J Neuroophthalmol. 2025 Aug 28. doi: 10.1097/WNO.0000000000002393. Online ahead of print.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Multimodal artificial intelligence (AI) models have recently expanded into video analysis. In ophthalmology, one exploratory application is the automated detection of extraocular movement (EOM) disorders. This proof-of-concept study evaluated the feasibility of using Gemini 2.0 to recognize EOM abnormalities, identify the affected eye, and recognize specific movement limitations from publicly available, real-world clinical videos.

METHODS: We retrospectively collected 114 YouTube videos of EOM disorders, including cranial nerve (CN) palsies, internuclear ophthalmoplegia (INO), supranuclear disorders, nystagmus, and ocular myasthenia gravis (MG), alongside 15 control videos demonstrating normal EOMs. Videos were trimmed to include only the pertinent clinical examinations, and audio was removed to avoid diagnostic cues. Using a standardized zero-shot prompt, Gemini 2.0 analyzed each video via the Google AI Studio platform. Gemini 2.0 was evaluated based on its ability to provide the correct diagnosis, identify the affected eye, and recognize the specific movement limitation (if any). Descriptive statistics, Spearman correlations, and comparative analyses were used to assess performance.

RESULTS: Gemini 2.0 correctly identified the primary diagnosis in 43 of 114 videos, yielding an overall diagnostic accuracy of 37.7%. Diagnostic performance varied by condition, with the highest accuracies observed in third nerve palsy (81.1%), INO (80.0%), sixth nerve palsy (66.7%), and ocular MG (20.0%), whereas normal EOMs were correctly classified in 93.3% of cases. In misclassified cases, the correct diagnosis appeared in the differential diagnosis in 15.5% of instances. Laterality was correctly identified in 26.5% of eligible cases overall, 73.1% among correctly diagnosed cases vs. 9.6% in misclassified ones. Similarly, movement limitations were accurately identified in 30.3% of eligible cases overall, with a marked increase to 88.5% accuracy in correctly diagnosed cases compared to 9.6% in misclassified cases. Longer videos moderately correlated with longer processing time (ρ = 0.55, P < 0.001). Significant correlations were observed between correct diagnosis and correct laterality identification (ρ = 0.45, P < 0.001), correct diagnosis and correct movement limitation identification (ρ = 0.61, P < 0.001), and laterality and movement limitation (ρ = 0.51, P < 0.001). Processing time averaged 11.0 seconds and correlated with video length (ρ = 0.55, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS: This proof-of-concept study demonstrates the feasibility of using Gemini 2.0 for automated recognition of EOM abnormalities in clinical videos. Although performance was stronger in overt cases, overall diagnostic accuracy remains limited. Substantial validation on standardized, clinician-annotated datasets is needed before clinical application.

PMID:40867040 | DOI:10.1097/WNO.0000000000002393


Source: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/4086704 ... t9+e462414
Si vous appréciez notre travail, merci de nous soutenir un petit don en cliquant ICI

Pour obtenir la traduction en français,
cliquez sur le bouton situé dans la barre des menus en haut de cette page 

Image


Pour les donateurs, si cet article vous intéresse, nous pouvons faire l’acquisition d'un tiré-à-part.
Merci d'en faire la demande sur [email protected]


Bonne lecture...
Répondre

Retourner vers « Echos de la recherche »